History
  • No items yet
midpage
106 So. 3d 1116
La. Ct. App.
2012
Read the full case

Background

  • 2005 divorce with joint custody; Mrs. Weaver as domiciliary custodial parent; Mr. Weaver ordered to pay $500 monthly and $800 every two weeks until $2,500 arrears were satisfied.
  • 2007 rule for contempt filed alleging nonpayment, garnishment, income assignment, and other relief; arrears alleged at $1,000; sought civil/criminal contempt and sanctions.
  • 2008 consent judgment (recorded 2011) requiring $700 monthly support via income assignment, with $100 arrears, medical payments, and proof of income; contempt waived upon compliance.
  • 2011 hearing: Mr. Weaver testified to regular payments since 2008 and various income sources; Mrs. Weaver testified to gaps and inconsistencies; trial court noted inconsistencies on both sides.
  • Trial court construed testimony and records, found Mrs. Weaver failed to prove nonpayment by a preponderance of the evidence, and denied the rule for contempt.
  • Appellate court affirmed the trial court’s judgment denying contempt.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Did plaintiff prove contempt by preponderance of the evidence? Weaver failed to pay arrears and missed payments as ordered. Weaver paid regularly; inconsistencies undermine plaintiff's claim. No; burden not met; credibility issues unresolved; contempt denied.

Key Cases Cited

  • In re Jones, 54 So.3d 54 (La.App. 5 Cir. 2010) (interdiction-related citation cited in opinion)
  • In re Interdiction of Jones, 56 So.3d 979 (La. 2011) (writ not considered; related to Jones citation)
  • Brunet v. Magnolia Quarterboats, Inc., 711 So.2d 308 (La.App. 5 Cir. 1998) (precedential support cited by court)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: Weaver v. Weaver
Court Name: Louisiana Court of Appeal
Date Published: Dec 11, 2012
Citations: 106 So. 3d 1116; 12 La.App. 5 Cir. 238; 2012 WL 6176838; 2012 La. App. LEXIS 1598; No. 12-CA-238
Docket Number: No. 12-CA-238
Court Abbreviation: La. Ct. App.
Log In
    Weaver v. Weaver, 106 So. 3d 1116